AIBU to refuse temporary accommodation for external work to our home?

[allowaccess]

Recently we were informed of exterior work to be done to our home (LA property). Nothing inside the house at all. No access needed to complete any of the external work other than access to the garden which is via a side gate not through the property.

We were instructed that for the duration of the work (no specific timeframe just ‘might be a few weeks’ ) that we would be placed in alternative accommodation that was miles away from where we are now and would cause significant issues for us with school as we have two children one with severe SEN. We also didn’t want to leave the house as it would be overwhelming for him to be away from familiarity for no real reason as it’s external work??

So we refused and set out in writing why. We were told no we have to vacate on a certain day. The only reason given when we pushed was ‘it will be noisy’. I said I’m fine to put up with some noise especially as it will only be between 8 am and-6pm. Again they said we need to vacate on the day and provide keys so they have access ??? They dont need access to inside.

The day has come and gone and we have stayed. My housing officer called on day 2 and said we need to allow access to the house while the work is ongoing. I said no as theres no need the work is external. They have said we need to allow access if needed to the team working. I told them again no the said they may need access to facilities! I said in that case they need to get portaloos if that’s the issue.

I then had an email giving another date to vacate for the work and a different address for temporary accommodation? Again I’ve said no. Can they actually force this or is it unreasonable as it’s not interior work ???

It hasn’t even been that noisy at all??

I would also ask if you are expected to pay rent whilst you are temporarily moved. If the answer is yes then they have no right to access to "use facilities." As you are paying for those including water rates, council tax and electricity. Or will they rebate you for these costs?

No you are pissed because ive shot down the arguments on this thread that ppl should move out and shown that it cant be done en masse when a whole estate is worked on. It is relevant to the thread because @allowaccess is having the same thing done You are only saying it isnt because it doesnt suit your side of the argument

They could

• Provide suitable local accommodation
• Assure OP they will suitable outside facilities for the contractors
• Provide evidence of liability insurance covering any damage to the interior of the OP's home if they need access for the works
• Provide a schedule of access required to the interior of the property with a rationale in order that OP can ensure she is present in the home during this period

The property is still hers whilst she has a contract with them.

Your point are fare
but your last point is unworkable

If op owned this house the access issue would go very differently. The workers would work around the family, ask nicely for access to facilities or get a portaloo. Or, if there really was the need for them to vacate, it would be a sensible and open discussion about the reasons.

Op doesn't own this house, but it is her home. I don't think it's unreasonable for the landlord/maintenance firm/whoever to have the kind of discussion with her which finishes with her either understanding the absolute need to vacate, or them understanding how to work around op's family. It's so dismissive and patronising for them to keep sending the same demands without proper explanation.

I hope it gets sorted ok in the end op x

Alternatively they could assure them in writing that a housing officer will be present during any interior access to supervise. Both options would be challenging but possible.

I agree with you on a conceptual level, the OP should be involved in discussion.

The big difference in those two situations though is who is paying.

When it is a private residence, you're paying for that kind of dialogue and consideration. The focus is on your own disruption.

The LA will be more concerned with getting things done quickly and efficiently and saving money where possible.

That doesn't make it right, but it does change the dynamic somewhat.

As someone who had the entire exterior of my home removed and replaced (dodgy cladding), I can only say that I wish I had been offered temporary accommodation because the noise, dust, and darkness (the exterior of the building was sheeted) were absolutely horrible. As was having workmen outside my 5th floor bedoroom window from 8am for 4 months.

You may find your DC finds it more disruptive to stay, to be honest

When I worked as a housing officer for a local authority if extensive works had to be done to a property then we offered a temporary decant to another property. I assume that's not a possibility? I think what concerns me about the work you are having done, OP is that if you have damp problems then it's quite possible that more works will need to be carried out, over and above what is planned. So, often, there will be another problem discovered after the work has started and that is why there is the vaguary about timescales. Local authorities now have to consider Awaabs Law when a property is damp so are stuck between a rock and a hard place.

I can assure you nobody did anything of the sort when my exterior works were carried out - and yes, I own my home.

Living through that sounds grim BitOutOfPractice. I hope the new cladding looks great and you don't have any more problems with your building.

So what are the solutions for a situation like this So far im the only one who has responded to this post.

Easy
Never agree to internal access unless works are being carried out internally

Totally agree. I was more aiming it at the posters who think OP should just suck it up. The fact that they ignored @Dixie81 post says a lot about them

I know who you were asking 😁
but we both know there’s no other answer to this

Generator will be nice and noisy and smelly! All more work and more cost but the op isn't paying.

Her rent pays for maintenance like all tenants

This book was published late last year @Dixie81
https://hqnetwork.co.uk/news/book-review-middle-ground-a-frontline-journey-in-social-housing/

Thats the reason they wanted you out, so they would have the use of your home.

Cheeky fxxkers.
Tell them to get a court order and you will go to the media to report they are moving SEN children so that your house and facilities can be used.

Absolute cheek of them.
Ask for their names too.

It's their home!? Then how about they arrange and pay for the repairs themselves?

Oh no, of course, want their cake and eat it. A nice, well looked after home, not needing to pay for any repairs, but control everything about how and when repairs to be done. Unreasonable!

I do get what you are saying Passaggressfedup.
Whoever pays the piper calls the tune an' all that.

But, I do not believe that people who can not afford to buy a house do not deserve a home. Everyone deserves a place to call home for the time they are living in it. That's not to say that they get to call the shots, but they do deserve the dignity of a sensible discussion.

Thank you. That's so kind. It was a very scary and worrying time as we (the leaseholders) were also liable for the £7.2m bill. The building works themselves were very disruptive - it seems like a distant nightmare, no thank goodness.

So many people are still affected by the post-Grenfell cladding scandal, though. It rumbles on.

They do however get to call the shots in terms of access in OPs situation
She does not have to give permission for access
She also does not have to pay for these repairs being carried out ( as some on here seem to think she should )

Agree
A sensible discussion well in advance would have been more appropriate so everyone could accommodate OPs and the builders needs and rights

EXACTLY You said it yourself Whoever pays the piper names the tune. So the contractors will only care about what the HA says because they are the ones paying them They wont be bothered about tenants or tenants property See @Dixie81 post. Not all contractors are like that though thankfully